The Funniest Thing

[Guest]

I was chit chatting today and my buddy. We had started to talk about the yet again delayed Hammer and it yet again cheap ass emulation of 64bit. When he came out with the funniest remark for it. "When the hammer is release Home Depot should have 5% off sale". That is the funniest [-peep-] i have ever heard, omg i almost pissed myself laughing. Later Monkeys.

SPUDMUFFIN


<font color=red>Being Evil Is Good. Cause I Can Be A Prick And Get Away With It.</font color=red> :lol:

 

[Guest]

Atleast it had point to it ?

I only steal the princess cause she is hot ;*)

 

[Guest]

I dont get it...

 

[Andyddr]

It` s some kinda Monkey language that only Baboons will understand.
But still SPUDMUFFIN I give u a 5 out of 5 for that last monkey article u wrote...little monkey shoes and pants and whatever....



Your new hardware is out-of-date

 

[Grizely1]

So, me and my bud, we were talking about the Itanium and it's cheap-ass 32bit emulation. LOL it runs 32bit like a Pentium 100! Then he said, "When Itanium is released, Costco should have a 15% off sale."

---------
I am the first and only one with a 16MB GeForce2 GTS graphics card!

 

[kurokaze]

I didn't get it either.. had to think about that one

Anyway.. the hammer shouldn't be running 64bit code in emulation.. it should both 32 and 64bit code natively.

Intel Components, AMD Components... all made in Taiwan!

 

[Guest]

It won't have IA64. Its forced to emulate IA64.

I only steal the princess cause she is hot ;*)

 

[ksoth]

Dude, IA64 is Intel's 64-bit processing. AMD's is x86-64. Hammer will not emulate 64-bit code, it will run in actual 64-bit mode via x86-64. When Hammer is said to not support IA64, that means it is just not compatible with that type of 64-bit code, just as IA64 will not be compatible with x86-64.

"Trying is the first step towards failure."

 

[ksoth]

The Home Depot joke just isn't that funny, or clever. I'm guessing it means something to the effect of Hammer's only use will be, uh, a tool? Pretty lame man. "When Northwood is finally released Home Depot should have a 5% off lumber sale." huh huh, duh. NOT FUNNY! You're a loser man.

"Trying is the first step towards failure."

 

[Guest]

I think he is calling you stupid spudmuffin. You better do something. Also try to make more sense.

I only steal the princess cause she is hot ;*)

 

[Guest]

BBAHAHAHAA lumber sale, now thats funny stuff

 

[Raystonn]

"that means it is just not compatible with that type of 64-bit code, just as IA64 will not be compatible with x86-64"

True. Unfortunately for AMD, Microsoft currently has no plans to support x86-64. The 64-bit Windows operating system is based on the IA-64 instruction set. Besides various unix operating systems, x86-64 processors will be restricted to 32-bit Windows OSes such as Windows 2000. AMD may be forced to eventually license IA64 as they did with IA32 (see the contract renewel press releases for more details on that.)

-Raystonn

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =

 

[Guest]

Will Linux (64-bit) benefit from the Hammer cpu's?


(A)bort, (R)etry, (G)et a beer?

 

[Kelledin]

Yes. AMD is working closely with the Open Source community on that.

Kelledin

bash-2.04$ kill -9 1
init: Just what do you think you're doing, Dave?

 

[Raystonn]

From the little I know of x86-64, the instruction set to be used solely by AMD's Hammer CPU, I believe there is an x86-64 port of Linux underway. Due to the major redesign of the IA64 instruction set, I expect an IA64 targetted Linux to vastly outperform an x86-64 targetted Linux. However, if you don't want to recompile your kernel and upgrade to 64-bits, the x86-64 processors will run old IA32 code faster than IA64 processors. Honestly though, what Linux gurus don't recompile their kernel at least weekly.

The benefits of purchasing a 64-bit CPU is to run 64-bit code. Those who'd rather stick with a 32-bit kernel would be well advised to stick with a 32-bit CPU. Most 32-bit CPUs will outperform their 64-bit counterparts when running the old 32-bit code (yes, this includes the Hammer.)

-Raystonn

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =

 

[Kelledin]

From <A HREF="http://www.a1-electronics.co.uk/AMD_Section/CPUs/Sledgehammer_64bitReview.html" target="_new">http://www.a1-electronics.co.uk/AMD_Section/CPUs/Sledgehammer_64bitReview.html</A>:

Operating system support, Sledgehammer & Clawhammer cpu processors.
Microsoft will be supporting the x86-64 architecture. In any case the AMD K8 architecture will be able to support 32-bit & 16-bit programs & be able to execute old versions of Windows 9x & NT based programs.

Actually, the jury's still out on this one. Microsoft hasn't publicly said "yes" or "no" to x86-64 support.

As for whether the VLIW instruction architecture will do better...that remains to be seen. This could go along with the entire CISC vs. RISC debate.

Kelledin

bash-2.04$ kill -9 1
init: Just what do you think you're doing, Dave?

 

[peteb]

Who's responsibility is it? I was just wondering 'cos I recall all those years back (and maybe still, I just don't have contact with them) you used to get different HAL verstions of NT3.5 and 3.51 for different processor architectures. I think there was even a Compaq HAL for NT???

-* This Space For Rent *-
email for application details

 

[AmdMELTDOWN]

come on we all know the hammer was named after Tom Hardware Guide.

how sweet!

"AMD/VIA...you are the weakest link, good bye!"

 

[Raystonn]

Last Autumn at a European developers' conference, a senior Microsoft staffer was asked if the next generation of Windows 2000 - codenamed Whistler, but now known as Windows XP - wouldn't be released earlier in order to cater for the release of AMD's Sledgehammer, the speaker said: "No, because we have no intention of supporting the Sledgehammer with Whistler."

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but that site is incorrect. They probably just assumed Microsoft would make an x86-64 version. They currently have no plans to do this. 64-bit Windows is tightly integrated with IA64.

-Raystonn

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =

 

[jollygrinch]

i'm not saying i disagree with you, i honestly don't know. but Kelledin provided a link. could you? i would appreciate it.

At the core of every system: "I'm sorry dave, i'm afraid i can't do that."

 

[Raystonn]

This was at a developers' conference, not from a website. I'll see what I can find.

....

I found something that mentioned it at: http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/3/17019.html

That article also mentions a couple comments written anonymously on internet forums, but I wouldn't give those any credence due to the anonymous nature of internet forums. The statement from the developers' forum did happen, though.

-Raystonn

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =

 

[Guest]

"True. Unfortunately for AMD, Microsoft currently has no plans to support x86-64."

A tad misleading.. As I recall, MS was actively looking into x86-64, but (indeed) had not decided yet if they would support it or not. They certainly didnt say "no". Anyway, porting to x86-64 would be a lot easier than supporting IA64. Also, keep in mind x86-64 is a lot "newer" than IA64 which intel has been telling us about with for many years.

"The 64-bit Windows operating system is based on the IA-64 instruction set".

"THE" 64 bit windows ? Who says there will be only one ?. Besides, I dont really think 64 bit windows is going to be anything major the comming years.. wether it be with intel or amd chips. The type of applications that may benfit of 64 bit (massive datawarehousing applications, scientific and engineering simulation kind of things,..) , are much more likely to be run on Unix OS-es... Or how many Alpha servers have you seen that run Windows ? 64 bit is not intended for the desktop for now. Intel's solution most certainly not..(unless you fancy running old 32-bit apps at P-100 speeds). With the hammer on your desktop, you may get 64 bit for free, but youre not likely to make much use of it.

 

[HolyGrenade]

First Whistler was supposed to be a pure 64bit operating system. Then everything got screwed up and they decided to merge it with neptune. This means there will be some hybrid code. So don't expect whistler to be the ultimate 64 bit platform, whatever the underlying architecture.

Whistler was was originally dated at late 2001 but now its like late 2002. Also, Microsoft allways have had several different versions of the same os for diferent architectures, So I wouldn't rule anything out.


<font color=red>"My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and dispair!"</font color=red>

 

[ajmcgarry]

Personally I would not like to see either AMD or Intel lose out in this one. It is better for the consumer when both are in with a fighting chance.
Why though are either company worried about backwards compatability at this stage? Why can't they just take the CPUs to the next evolutionary step. They have the chance to drop all the mistakes of the past and start something new. The IA32 instruction set is hardly the most efficient, and it's too old.
They are too caught up in the marketing to bother thinking about the technology. After all IA32 could be emulated on the 64bit chips whatever they are.
I think AMD are making a bad technological decision to support the old instruction sets, but it's a good marketing one. I can only see it working in the short term though. Maybe thats what they want?

<font color=red>Why don't you ever see the headline "Psychic Wins Lottery"?</font color=red>

 

[Fltsimbuff]

Actually, I've read somewhere that the Hammer will run 32-bit code faster than *any* current 32-bit CPU out there... this was of course awhile back, and I'll try to confirm... If you can provide any confirmation otherwise, I'd like to see it .